Would you still get equity grants and bonuses if you went on strike while working at a normal company?
If they had already been paid out, yes. Company bought you a $10k car in January, you strike in March. The company isn’t allowed to retroactively “unbuy” the car and declare that you now owe them $10k. Even if the condition for keeping the car was a full year’s employment you can’t take it — striking isn’t legally quitting. Even stronger, if employees usually get an annual bonus but the year of the strike they don’t…
Bone headed move. They must have miscalculated if they think the students will cave to this pressure. Also, how can they take away tuition reimbursement for the whole semester if the strike hasnt been that long? Garbage administration. I hope the students win and that this isnt the new normal.
Certainly a garbage administration. This is a huge signal to prospective graduate students not to apply to Temple University, a clear signal that they care more about money than your education. Grad students being at the bottom of the administrative priorities is nothing new, but threatening to prevent them from taking classes is a new low.
As various lawyers have commented on Twitter, this seems like an insanely blatant violation of labor laws. Just a straight up written confession of illegal retaliation. Unless they have some obscure exemption that nobody else knows about, I cannot imagine how the university's legal counsel signed off on this.
There are reports from strikers trying to refill medication that the medical benefit suspension has already unilaterally gone into effect. The university has gone ahead with their threats in that regard (which is especially shitty since it's pretty standard in the US to give employees a health insurance grace period on termination). I am really confused about what the university thinks they're going to get out of the…
What do you mean? The university is trying to teach a lesson by inflicting pain on those who stood against it. I thought that was clear.
Do you maybe mean "what makes them think that this is legal?" I doubt they do. But they likely decided that value of sending a "don't fuck with us" message was higher than the cost of the likely mild consequences.
As various lawyers have commented on Twitter, this seems like an insanely blatant violation of labor laws. Just a straight up written confession of illegal retaliation. Unless they have some obscure exemption that nobody else knows about, I cannot imagine how the university's legal counsel signed off on this.
Can you point to some of those Twitter comments? I'm honestly curious of which labor laws they are violating. For example, I just did a search regarding healthcare for striking workers, and there is no federal law that prevents cancelling healthcare, to the point that some congresspeople have introduced bills in the last year to specifically outlaw that (but, to emphasize, those are just bills, they haven't been pass…
You can't retaliate against workers for taking a protected concerted action to change something about their workplace. The wrinkle is that Temple's employees are public-sector employees, who are exempt from the NLRA --- but they're not necessarily exempt from equivalent Philadelphia law.
You can take health care away from employees (absent a contract) in general, but you can't do it in retaliation for striking.
Bone headed move. They must have miscalculated if they think the students will cave to this pressure. Also, how can they take away tuition reimbursement for the whole semester if the strike hasnt been that long? Garbage administration. I hope the students win and that this isnt the new normal.
> Bone headed move. They must have miscalculated if they think the students will cave to this pressure It´s not about caving, I don´t think. It´s about maximum damage. University administration is one of the most ruthless groups you can come across. They´re well aware that they hold the future ambitions of these students in their hands. Even if they get sued, even if they lose, they´re well aware that they can utterl…
The story of Mackenzie Fierceton is a perfect example.
These scumbags in university administration could not care less about ruining a student's future. They have nothing to lose.
Bone headed move. They must have miscalculated if they think the students will cave to this pressure. Also, how can they take away tuition reimbursement for the whole semester if the strike hasnt been that long? Garbage administration. I hope the students win and that this isnt the new normal.
Shitty people push/bend the rules as far as they can, to see what they can get away with. If they lose, they don’t lose much. If they win, it becomes the new normal, in their favor.
I too hope they lose and are shamed (assuming they feel any shame at all). But I think they know what they’re doing
But it's not pay. Their stipend would be pay. The tuition would be a benefit, just as tuition assistance programs at companies are benefits. It's perfectly legal to suspend benefits and pay during a strike, but they must be reinstated when the strike is over. Right or wrong, it seems primia facie legal. Edit: why disagree? What have I said that's factually incorrect? Please, educate us all and add to the discussion i…
Right but they’re not suspending the benefit they’re cancelling it. If they pro-rated a portion of the tuition assistance as owed that would be defensible. But this is a rug-pull.
Is it pro-rated for students who dropout, or more accurately continue to study while dropping out of work-study, during the semester? Depending on how the explaination of benefits is written, it may not pro-rate. Hell, most companies require you pay back tuition assistance if you leave within 2 years after they pay.
Can you point to some of those Twitter comments? I'm honestly curious of which labor laws they are violating. For example, I just did a search regarding healthcare for striking workers, and there is no federal law that prevents cancelling healthcare, to the point that some congresspeople have introduced bills in the last year to specifically outlaw that (but, to emphasize, those are just bills, they haven't been pass…
This (see below) seems to be the problem - students are being forced to pay for something that was originally gratis (punished) because they are protesting about something. That is not normally how a liberal democracy works. We don't punish requests for comments, we engage ... ================================================= Dear Temple Student: As a result of your participation in the TUGSA strike, your tuition rem…
But look at this closely, with engagement. Currently, they are on strike, so tuition remissions cannot be issued. If that remains the case until March 6th, they will need to pay. If the strike is resolved before March 6th, and then they still refuse to issue the remissions, that would be a significant violation.
If waived tuition fees is part of the graduate students benefits do they have to include it in their tax declarations? Do they pay tax on this "benefit"?
That was the focus of a fight when Trump was pushing for tax reform in 2017. Students would need to pay taxes on the remitted tuition which can be a few hundred to a few thousand dollars, which is a lot of money -- many don't even have $20k in total annual salary. In the end that part of the law did not change and students did not pay that extra tax.
Good luck to Temple operating without the grad student labor. They are the backbone of all major universities.
80% of their grad student labor is continuing to work.
According to a university official, with no explanation of how they came up with that number. Unions typically needs a certain percent of the vote to approve a strike.
IMO — this will impact prospective students’ opinions towards the university for a longer time period than the strike.